When it comes to the liturgy of the Roman rite, some would have you believe that you have two choices, the progressive Novus Ordo mass at St. Banal of Boringham parish or the Traditional Latin Mass at the Parish of Quo Primum on the corner of Lunatic and Fringe.

They would also have you believe that never the twain shall meet, that until the Pope of Future Past arrives to reform the Novus Ordo, that any chance of recovering what was traditionally considered sacred and reverential in the Novus Ordo is impossible, regardless of whether you consider that a feature or a bug.

But this is simply not true. There are many things that Pastors and Priests could do tomorrow to help restore a sense of the sacred and proper reverence to the liturgy, things that are perfectly in line with Vatican II. Further, this is no theoretical exercise, there are pastors all around that have done some or even all of these things.

Ad Orientem. The mass being said ad orientem means that the priest and the faithful face the same direction, (liturgical) east. Many people think that Vatican II or the Novus Ordo requires the priest to face the people. This is simply not true. In fact, the rubrics of the new mass anticipates that the mass be said ad orientem and instructs the priest when he should face the people.

I can think of no one single thing that could do more to properly orient the minds and hearts of the faithful (not to mention the priest) than restoring ad orientem worship. I commend to you the letter that Fr. Richard Heilman wrote to a priest about the fruits of this change one year after its implementation. No permission or indult is required to make this change as it is just as the mass was originally intended. All that is needed is a willing priest and time to properly educate the faithful.

Restore chant and polyphony. Ditch the lame hymnal and its happy-clappy anthropocentrism and bring back chant and polyphony. Again, this is exactly for what Vatican II called, "The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services. But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action, as laid down in Art. 30." Moreover, the priest should chant the mass with the faithful providing chanted responses. A priest could even chant the propers. All this can take time and a concerted effort at education, the payoff could be immense.

Latin, yes Latin!! Again, Vatican II's Sacrosanctum Concilium "Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites." What Vatican II envisioned was the use of the vernacular for the variable parts of the mass, "This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants." But the parts of the mass that are the same every week could be in Latin, the people could be educated on this, education, translation cheat sheets, and time could restore that which was always to be preserved. At the very least, prayers like the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei should be in Latin and the Kyrie in Greek as many people are already familiar with them.

Proper Reception of Communion, Kneeling and On The Tongue. In his article at New Liturgical Movement, Fr. Richard Heilman does all the heavy lifting on this topic.

Why Kneel?

Pope Benedict XVI, has noted that kneeling is "an expression of Christian culture, which transforms the existing culture through a new and deeper knowledge and experience of God." He reminds us that "the word proskynein alone occurs fifty-nine times in the New Testament, twenty-four of which are in the Apocalypse, the book of the heavenly liturgy, which is presented to the Church as the standard for her own liturgy."

In his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, Pope Benedict speaks of a "story that comes from the sayings of the Desert Fathers, according to which the devil was compelled by God to show himself to a certain Abba Apollo. He looked black and ugly, with frightening thin limbs, but, most strikingly, he had no knees. The inability to kneel is seen as the very essence of the diabolical."

Why Receive on the tongue?

Despite the widespread practice of Communion in the hand, the universal discipline of receiving Holy Communion on the tongue has not changed. A bishop, for example, may forbid the practice of Communion in the hand but not the practice of Communion on the tongue. The Church strongly encourages the latter but not the former. With respect to Communion in the hand, the Church speaks only in a cautionary tone because of the many abuses that often accompany this practice.

Kneeling and receiving the Eucharist on the tongue encourages you to really think about what it is you are doing while at the same time showing proper respect for the Eucharist. Adding or using a communion rail is the best way to encourage proper reception.

Speaking of respect for the Eucharist

No More Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion. The use of of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion is supposed to be just that, extraordinary. The use of EMHC's for the regular distribution of communion at ordinary masses is an abuse, pure and simple.

§ 1. The canonical discipline concerning extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion must be correctly applied so as to avoid generating confusion. The same discipline establishes that the ordinary minister of Holy Communion is the Bishop, the Priest and the Deacon.[96] Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are those instituted as acolytes and the faithful so deputed in accordance with Canon 230, § 3.[97]

§ 2. Extraordinary ministers may distribute Holy Communion at eucharistic celebrations only when there are no ordained ministers present or when those ordained ministers present at a liturgical celebration are truly unable to distribute Holy Communion.[99] They may also exercise this function at eucharistic celebrations where there are particularly large numbers of the faithful and which would be excessively prolonged because of an insufficient number of ordained ministers to distribute Holy Communion.

The ordinary ministers are Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. When every Tom, Dick, and Jane runs up to the sanctuary and hands out communion, the sacredness of the Eucharist is diminished.

Appropriate Attire. This is all about education, education, and more education. Priests and pastors should repeatedly preach and educate the faithful about proper attire for mass. Nobody would dress in flip flops and tank top to a job interview, or to meet the President or the Pope, but meeting our Lord and Savior in the Eucharist? Other things Priest can do is ditch the altar server's potato sack robes and replace them with cassocks and surplices. Priest's could teach about the sacredness of women and encourage use of the veil. Everybody knows that what we wear changes how we behave and how we behave changes how we think.

General Reverence and Sacredness. This is all about eliminating disruption and restoring a sense of the sacred. Some things to consider here are:

Eliminating the Sign of Peace by the Faithful. It is only an option and not mandatory and often very disruptive.

More Incense.

Great attention to reverence and precision by the Priests and servers.

Priestly ad libs banished!

The priest should avoid wandering around during the homily.

I don't pretend that any of these things are easy for the priests or the faithful, but they are all doable and many priests and pastors have implemented many or all of these things. Some of these things may be particularly difficult for some older parishioners, boomers and beyond, no doubt. But to avoid restoring the sacred for the sake of these is simply to make the dying patient comfortable rather than trying to cure the disease.

In all these things, the priest must be committed to education and some may take time. Parishes that have implemented many of these changes have seen tremendous blessings.

Patricia Mary, the point isn’t what we prefer or want but the effect that changes have had on the faithful. If you can’t see how 90% of the young adults are leaving the Church and 75% of all Catholics in the US don’t even bother to attend, you don’t see the point. What will help the faithful get closest to God is the most important thing. The actions we make with our bodies, the things we see with our eyes, the things we hear with our ears, these all effect the things we feel with our hearts. If we show a lack of respect with our bodies, we develop a lack of respect in our minds. If the music and actions of the Mass are a poor copy of worldly entertainment, we will think of the Mass as been a poor form of entertainment.

Maybe you are not like most of us our here and your actions don’t effect your feels, but for most of us, we need everything we can to keep us close to God.

Posted by Barb on Monday, Sep, 1, 2014 2:58 PM (EDT):

When parish priests are encouraged to ‘‘do their own thing’’ the main stream laity is happy to follow suit. It has become about the comfort and mood of the participants and not about reverence for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (they really don’t know any better). Your suggestions are perfect, Patrick. Further, if, during the homily, each priest were to describe what occurs during Transubstantiation (for the many uninformed laity) in a reverend manner, and if he were to do so in emulation of the angel Gabriel, whose heraldic greeting to the Blessed Virgin was transfixing and who might say if he were to visit us at Mass, ‘‘Behold the Lamb of God,” in such a way as to grab the immediate attention of the flock, then much of what is wrong would be righted by just that very instruction. As Theresa H. opines in the comment above yours, Patricia Mary, we have lost a sense of the sacred worship that the Old Testament is filled with. And much of what the Old Testament evinces is God’s instruction in symbolism and in His spoken word.

Most practicing Catholics know that angels are present above the Altar when Transubstantiation occurs but many parishioners who were schooled as part of the Vatican II debacle (of changes in catechetical instruction) are clueless. Let’s ask our priests to edify them. Now, that would be a revelation! I guarantee you that many priests would balk at this. In fact they would become outright indignant that a parishioner would make such a suggestion. I believe many of these priests have been turned over to their own depravities for relying on their own tuition rather than the will of God. You will be able to tell the good priests from the new order by the reactions.

I would run to the nearest TLM.

Posted by Patricia Mary on Sunday, Aug, 31, 2014 7:55 AM (EDT):

I read this article with great disappointment. It should be titled Mass for the ADHD Catholic.
If we are so easily distracted by the sex of the altar servers, the priest’s face, what others are wearing and how others receive communion I think we need to look inside our hearts.
Canon law is not the answer to our lacking faith. Asking others to change things to the “old way” will not increase our faith but it will satisfy that desire to make our little faith comfortable and “just the way I remember it”.

Posted by Theresa H on Saturday, Aug, 30, 2014 9:24 PM (EDT):

Sadly, I suspect not much will change re. the “sense of the sacred” in the manner in which the Mass is celebrated—most especially by the people—unless our Bishops speak up in their dioceses. Let’s pray for this—and that at least our new seminarians will be taught “the sense of the sacred.” Then, hopefully, they will win over the “faithful” to a greater “sense of the sacred” during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass—from beginning to end. We have abandoned this “spiritual sense” for 20-30 years, at least. Consequently, we need to re-discover the “sense” that our Churches, themselves—as the Bible says, are “house[s] of prayer,” indeed, “the house of God,” the “gate of heaven!” We have lost and forgotten so much—and spiritually suffered the consequences in our families!!! May God have mercy on us in HIS Church!

Posted by Louis Melahn, L.C. on Friday, Aug, 29, 2014 4:06 AM (EDT):

Here are a couple of other suggestions: (1) using beautiful and dignified liturgical vestments (chasuble, stole) and sacred vessels (chalice, paten, ciborium); (2) using the words given in the Missal to introduce the Penitential Rite, the Lords Prayer, etc., not an improvisation; (3) allowing only a pipe organ to accompany the music (possibly, for a very special occasion, other classical instruments, but never piano or guitar); (4) when English-language hymns are desired, making use of the venerable traditional hymnody; (5) enforcing silence before and after Mass, as well as in the sacristy.

Posted by Theresa H on Sunday, Aug, 24, 2014 3:22 PM (EDT):

I see I didn’t complete my thought above and made a big mistake! In fact, “A person who is to receive the Most Holy Eucharist is to abstain for at least one hour from any food and drink except for water and medicine….The elderly, the infirm, and those who care for them can receive the most Holy Eucharist even if they have eaten something within the previous hour.” (Canon 919) Sorry!

Posted by Tucson on Sunday, Aug, 24, 2014 5:56 AM (EDT):

Get and read the GIRM!

A reading describes in detail how the priest must say the Mass.

With respect to Communion on the tongue, one priest can distribute Holy Communion much faster than he can to people who are standing up and receiving in the hand. So, you don’t need a lot of priests to distribute Holy Communion if people are kneeling at the altar rail.

Perhaps someone could find a YouTube of a priest giving out Holy Communion to an altar rail full of people kneeling. It’s very smooth and very fast.

Posted by Theresa H on Saturday, Aug, 23, 2014 9:16 AM (EDT):

While the “obligation” to “Fast” has been removed, there is nothing that says we can’t fast from midnight until after morning Mass…. I imagine many people today have never even heard of the Midnight Fast before Communion. The same regarding abstaining from meat on Fridays….I would wager that today, most people do not know we ever fasted from meat on Fridays or if we did, “why” we fasted from meat….At the time the Friday abstinence from meat “obligation” was removed we were told that we should substitute some other form of Friday penance….Do people substitute? I’m inclined to think we did lose, more or less, a sense of the “Sacred” and the need for “Penance” (including Confession!) when the Church removed these “obligations”.... But are we any different than all the generations before us? “Unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish!” And: “When the Son of Man comes, do you think He will find faith on the earth?”....Who knows WHEN Jesus will come? What we do know is that “70 is the sum of our years, or 80 if we are strong.” (Ps. 90:10) I suspect “wisdom [still] comes with age”(Job 12:12)—most of the time!

Posted by Tucson on Saturday, Aug, 23, 2014 4:01 AM (EDT):

Back to GIRM.

Those are the rules for how the Mass is to be conducted.

Before the changes in the 1960’s, the priest did not “process” up the center aisle: he entered the sanctuary from the sacristy.

There was no hand shaking.

No glad handing.

No focus on one another.

The Mass from the beginning to the end was fully and totally focused on Jesus in the Eucharist who was about to be confected.

In fact, originally we had to fast from Midnight ... so that our total focus was on Jesus.

Tuscan, if you inquire of your Pastor, or at the Chancery of your Diocese, the “Extraordinary Form” of the Mass (Tridentine Mass in Latin) may be offered somewhere in your diocese….Shortly before he resigned, Pope Benedict XVI said that no special approval is needed to offer the Tridentine Mass anymore. I have been attending the Tridentine Mass (approved to be offered in our Cathedral Chapel every Sunday) once every month, or so, for the last three or four years.

Posted by Larry Northon on Tuesday, Aug, 19, 2014 10:21 PM (EDT):

Tucson: Only God knows, but there are a lot of possibilities. She would almost certainly have found herself in a worse predicament. She might have wound up dead—or so dead in sin that she would despair of salvation, and consequently wind up in hell. But if, on the other hand, she had gone back to the Lord or to his Church after the Ascension, she would have been forgiven again—and may at that time have found the strength to stay on the right path.

Posted by Tucson on Tuesday, Aug, 19, 2014 9:33 PM (EDT):

Jesus said, “I do not condemn you”.

That gets brought up time and time again.

But then He said, “Go, and sin no more.”

So, what would have happened if the woman DID sin again?

Posted by Larry Northon on Tuesday, Aug, 19, 2014 7:47 PM (EDT):

“We are ALL entitled to what we consider sacred.” I guess that statement sums up what bothers me with a lot of present-day Catholics, yourself included. You seem to have this self-righteous sense of entitlement to whatever you consider appropriate or (more to the point)pleasing without ever once entertaining the thought that PERHAPS there could be a dichotomy between your will and the will of God. This is, probably, THE error of modern-day Catholics—an entirely unjustified self-assurance that whatever I want must necessarily be what God wants, or at the very least God is content to approve whatever I deem pleasant, and I need never search the Scriptures and the Catechism—or pray for Divine guidance to see if, perhaps, I must change my way of thinking completely on any given subject or risk the eternal loss of my soul. Read the gospels completely—from the first verse of Matthew to the last verse of the Gospel of John. Notice the great number of times Jesus lectures on the possibility of going to hell—and every time, he portrays the damned souls as having been stunned to learn at their Last Judgment that they are completely out of harmony with God, when all along they had assumed they were good and holy people on their way to heaven. The way he tells it, none of the damned will have ever thought that they, of all people, could have POSSIBLY wound up in hell because they were too good. You say, “We shake hands, hug, laugh, cry, clap, sing, and fiercely love and worship the Lord!” But the LORD says, “not everyone who says, ‘Lord, Lord’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of the Father.” You say, “we…fiercely love…the Lord.” So you say. But does GOD consider that you are loving him? Will HE say to YOU at your judgment, “I never knew you. Depart from me, you evildoer?” Will YOU say to HIM in reply, “Lord, Lord, did I not prophesy in your name? Did I not do mighty deeds in your name? Did I not shake hands, hug, laugh, cry, clap, sing and fiercely love and worship you—all in your name?” And will he then repeat to you, “I never knew you. Depart from me, you evildoer?” To answer this question, you can’t just refer to your own feelings and desires. You have to search outside of yourself to the teachings of the Church—and I don’t sense that willingness in your posts. Your outlook is dangerously self-referential—and I mean “dangerously” in terms of your eternal soul. Didn’t Pope Francis warn against a “self-referential” Church? This point is important. You are not the best judge of whether you are holy. I am not the best judge of whether I am holy. The CHURCH is, since the Church is the Lord’s gift to us for this very purpose. In the same way, I am not the best judge of whether I am physically healthy. No one is. A man or woman who hasn’t been to the doctor in twenty or thirty years because he or she feels just fine, might have insanely high blood pressure and be a walking time bomb—and would never know it! For someone who says we should not judge others, you seem awfully judgmental towards ME. You interpret my attempts to help you recognize and avoid spiritual danger as just someone being mean and liking to bicker. That’s pretty judgmental in itself, not to mention just plain proud. In my experience, the people who holler the most about being non-judgmental are the most proud and judgmental people you’ll ever run into.

Posted by Lisa on Tuesday, Aug, 19, 2014 6:31 PM (EDT):

Larry, this will be my very last post. It seems to me that you like picking apart things, making up your own interpretations, and adding things to what people write, AND that you want to bicker back and forth with someone. Let me tell you that, that is not going to be with me. I also do not like how condescending you are ( Tucson ). And I want no part of it. You asked for my reasons and I gave them to you plain and simple. We are ALL entitled to what we consider sacred.
God is incredibly good to us and I try very hard to always see the positive as well as the goodness within all people. It seems to me that you are way to concerned with the actions and “sins” of others. Why is that? Perhaps if you would focus more on Jesus and a little less on the “short skirts” and “deplorable plunging necklines” you say you see at Mass then I think you might become a happier person. Also I want you to know that my wonderful Priest TELLS me every week good ways in which I can live my life. I am pretty sure he has me going on the “right track”. I appreciate your offer to “set me straight” but I think I will pass. Thank you anyway. The last thing I want to say is that I LOVE the sacredness of my Church! We shake hands, hug, laugh, cry, clap, sing, and fiercely love and worship the Lord! And surprise, surprise, we also gamble, play bingo, and drink beer! We work hard together, play hard together and pray even harder and I wouldn’t want to change a thing!
May God’s peace be in your heart. I wish you well.

Posted by Larry Northon on Monday, Aug, 18, 2014 11:13 PM (EDT):

Tucson: I must admit that I’m a bit puzzled. You’ve been a Catholic since roughly 1940 give or take. You’ve been going to daily Mass since circa 1953 or so. It is now the late summer of 2014. And you have “no idea” what those terms mean which you cite? I find that very hard to believe—but the Novus Ordo, or “New Order” is simply the Mass approved by Paul VI (I believe in 1970) formally implementing the changes in the Mass approved by Vatican II—changes which in fact had already been phased in starting around 1964, such as the vernacular, lay readers and various other things. The “Extraordinary Form” and “Tridentine Latin Mass” are one and the same—the Mass which you attended every day from 1953 give-or-take until 1964 when they began doing things far differently. The 1962 version of that older, Latin Mass—now known as the “Extraordinary Form”—is undergoing a revival.

Posted by Larry Northon on Monday, Aug, 18, 2014 11:01 PM (EDT):

Lisa: Well, let’s take it one by one. I don’t believe numbers one and two require any comment from me. As for number three, my preference is the same as yours. Number 4: you’re being very inconsistent here. You insist that your prerogatives be respected—that no one try to impose their preferences on you, but you object to the person in front of you kneeling to receive Communion, which the Holy See has said emphatically anyone has a RIGHT—yes, a “right”—to do. You would impose YOUR preferences on them, when in fact the kneeling position has much history behind it, in contrast to the standing position. You demand that no one tread on you, but you are quite willing to play the dictator towards others. I’d suggest you attend to the beam in your own eye on that matter. I take it that you receive Communion on the tongue, because you say you don’t consider yourself holier than those who receive on the hand. But I wouldn’t want you to. I did not suggest that people who receive on the tongue are holier. What I do say is that the act of receiving on the tongue is a respectful gesture towards the Body and Blood of Christ—receiving in the hand is not, and permission for that mode should be withdrawn. On number 5: no one has a “right” to be a Eucharistic Minister, any more than anyone has a “right” to be a priest, bishop, deacon, cardinal, pope, nun or lay brother. These are privileges granted or withheld by the Church. And the Church is very clear: lay Eucharistic Ministers are to be used when and ONLY when there are not enough bishops, priests or deacons on hand to give out Communion. Otherwise, the latter three are the proper dispensers of Holy Communion—NOT laymen. That’s just the way it is. On number 6: no one should be judged on their dress. I have severe health and money problems myself, and I don’t come to mass all dandied up, either. But I also don’t wear shorts—nor do I wear T-shirts with worldly slogans or logos on them. Skirts which would be T-shirts if they were an inch shorter and necklines that plunge nearly to the Equator are inexcusable and deplorable. On 7-A: I wouldn’t suggest doing away with the sign of peace. But you say that we need to “respect” the wise decisions made by the hierarchy on these matters. Well, the hierarchy has just ruled that the displays of the sign of peace need to be toned down in their extravagance. Are you willing to “respect” that ruling? Or do you wish to “respect” only those decisions which fit your preferences? Incense? I have no particular opinion here. Now on 7-C, you say, “I don’t care how or from where a Priest gives his homily, as long as it hits my heart.” Well now, what do you mean by that? Just what “hits your heart?” Perhaps you could be more specific. “I also think that instead of ‘pushing back ’ we need to live in love and concentrate not so much on what others are doing, but concentrate on doing all that we can to make ‘ourselves’ worthy of Him.” But how can you be expected to make yourself worthy of Him if no one bothers to TELL you how to do that? What if you’re on the wrong track? You’ve heard the words of the Lord in the Gospel: “not everyone who says, ‘Lord, Lord’ shall enter the kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of the Father.” Jesus is saying that it’s possible for you to go to Mass every weekend, say all the right things, do all the right gestures—and still be in a state of mortal sin, living one heartbeat away from hell. Don’t you want to make sure you know exactly how to do the will of the Father? Does someone “live in love” by NOT trying to set you straight?

Posted by Lisa on Monday, Aug, 18, 2014 9:58 PM (EDT):

Larry: I will make this as short and to the point as I can. Here are just some of my thoughts on the “7 things” and
why I don’t want to change back to them.
1… I like having the Priest face me. Being able to witness the Eucharistic prayers and the miracle that happens, is truly mesmerizing, prayerful, powerful, and beautiful, and I want to see it all happening right before my very eyes.
2. I love variety in music. I love the powerful, peaceful ones, as well as the uplifting spirit filled ones that I can sing at the top of my lungs. At my church we even throw in some Latin and Spanish ones once in a while. I do not want to go back to just chanting.
3. I personally do not want to ever go back to a Latin Mass. Been there, done that, and just don’t want to do it again.
I am glad that some people like it but it is not for me.
4. We are given the option to receive Jesus by hand or mouth. It is a personal choice and I do not consider myself any better or holier than those who receive by hand. Like everyone else I spend the entire Eucharistic prayer on my knees, then stand and make my way towards the altar. What is really distracting for me is when I am almost there, the person in front of me drops to their knees (kicking me in the process) to receive communion, and then they want me to help them back to their feet. I am all for helping people out but this forces me out of my moment. Not fair! So my thinking is that since Communion kneelers are no longer available it might be best if we all receive standing.
5. I personally believe any faith filled, God loving person, if asked and commissioned, has the right to be a Eucharistic Minister. At our Church we even have High School students both male and female distributing and they do an excellent job, are wonderful role models for others, and have never let us down.
6. I have long since stopped judging people by what they wear to Church. God welcomes everyone so why shouldn’t I?
We don’t know what circumstances exist in the lives of others. They could have just spent all night in the emergency room with a loved one and just felt the need for a break and to get to Mass. We truly shouldn’t judge anyone but should be happy they obviously want to be there. In other words we need stop focusing on others and keep our eyes fixed on Jesus!
7. A….I love the sign of peace and am TOLD every week to ” extend a sign of peace to those around me”. To me it is a
beautiful sign of God’ s love and peace in an often very broken world.
B… As for incense…. To much of a good thing can turn bad. My husband is just one of many that get physically sick when incense is over used.
C… I don’t care how or from where a Priest gives his homily, as long as it hits my heart.

You said in your response to me that Bishops, Priests, and others, have at times, been weak and sneaky in making decisions and changes. I’m sorry but I don’t think that you were there when they prayed, discussed or “snuck” some of these changes in, and I still say that they did, and they still do, what they think is best for the majority of Catholics, and we need to respect their decisions.
I also think that instead of “pushing back ” we need to live in love and concentrate not so much on what others are doing, but concentrate on doing all that we can to make “ourselves” worthy of Him. I hope this helps you out.

Posted by Tucson on Monday, Aug, 18, 2014 7:49 PM (EDT):

Read the book: “Why Catholics Can’t Sing”.

Would someone be so kind as to explain what are:

Novus Ordo

Extraordinary Form

Tridentine Latin Masses

I have no idea. Only been Catholic for 70+ years. And been going to daily Mass since I was a teenager.

Posted by Theresa H on Monday, Aug, 18, 2014 11:03 AM (EDT):

As an addition to my above comments: I attend a rather unique Parish….About 50% of the members consists of mostly retired folks (partly due to a huge retirement complex next door) and the other 50% a Spanish community—a mix of mostly young families that come from wherever in the city area and speak Spanish. The Bishop set this up here with our former pastor about 12 yrs ago; their Mass is in Spanish. (From what I gather, they were going to Protestant Spanish-speaking churches! Would be wonderful if we also had a Latin Mass here, but I suspect I might be the only one attending!)—The older folks are the pre/post Vatican II generation that experienced the first “changes” in the Mass—and got so used to “change” that we have even added a few of our own—that it seems we are stuck with. Consequently, I go to the Tridentine Mass once a month, or so, celebrated at the Cathedral in town.

Posted by St Donatus on Monday, Aug, 18, 2014 9:58 AM (EDT):

@Theresa H,

Yes, we must always balance the material prosperity of the Church with the salvation of souls. Sadly, finances are a reality of life. But I have always found that those priests that take a firm stand on morals (with mercy) and preach it from the pulpit, will at first receive much resistance to the point of severe financial hardship. This usually lasts long enough for the ‘protestantized’ Catholics to leave and those who love God and the Church to find that their is a solid priest in the area. Then things turn around quickly, the parish become vibrant, starts becoming much more prosperous, and the faith lives of the parishioners is improved dramatically.

One caviat on that though, these Parishes that have made this type of move, also added a Latin Mass or a much more reverent NO mass with the suggestions in the article, so the improvements in the Parish is most likely attributable to both.

Posted by mrscracker on Monday, Aug, 18, 2014 9:35 AM (EDT):

Posted by Tucson on Sunday, Aug 17, 2014 12:38 PM (EDT):

A very old Catholic informed me that church music is supposed to be either the organ or indigenous instruments. He said the ONLY musical instrument indigenous to the United States is the banjo.”
*****************************
My son used to play his banjo for the Sunday evening Mass for teens.Fr. Paul was a bit surprised.Now I can tell him it was the correct thing to do.
:)

Posted by Theresa H on Monday, Aug, 18, 2014 9:08 AM (EDT):

Re. the Sunday Homily: I think many priests give a “bland” homily because they fear if they address moral matters some people will stop coming to Church—and they probably will! Other people are so bold as to chide priests when they speak about morals—and, yup, they may not come back to that Church again, either!

Posted by Tucson on Monday, Aug, 18, 2014 4:24 AM (EDT):

“But didn’t the liturgy originally include the kiss of peace? Do you think this should replace the handshake?”

Answer: NO!

Nothing interrupted the Mass at that point.

Neither did people greet one another at the beginning of the Mass.

All that greeting business was all new. From the moment you entered the church building you were there to worship and adore God ... without disturbing the concentration of the other worshippers.

After Mass on the way out, you could visit in the vestibule.

They got rid of Communion breakfasts and the Holy Name Society. How did that help? It didn’t.

Any conversations that took place were done with whispers.

Posted by Larry Northon on Sunday, Aug, 17, 2014 10:50 PM (EDT):

Lisa: But which “changes that have happened in the church” are you referring to? And which “preferences, wishes, and wants” do you insist not be foisted upon you? I can only decide to agree or disagree with you on a case-by-case basis. Some changes were indeed “only done after much discussion and prayer,” and need not be done away with. For example, the Council did indeed mandate that Latin continue to have a place in the liturgy, but it also allowed the vernacular. There’s no reason why English would have to be abolished. Which way the priest ought to face I think is a debatable issue. Communion-in-the-hand is a highly dubious change which the American bishops, many of whom were heterodox and insubordinate in those days, rammed down the throat of a Holy See during the weak, ineffective leadership of Paul VI. I saw no good reason for it in 1974 and see no reason why permission should NOT be revoked now (and EVERY reason why it SHOULD be revoked) and the norm of Communion-on-the-tongue be restored to exclusivity. Many places, such as Mother Angelica’s monastery, either ban the reception-in-hand or politely request that the host be received on the tongue only. Reception in the hand is unnecessary and disrespectfully casual towards the Body and Blood of Christ. Other changes definitely were NOT “only done after much discussion and prayer”—but either were sneaked through under the radar by hipster priests, or just happened as congregations became less and less reverent in their outward behavior during mass and there was no pushback by the hierarchy. Just recently, the Holy See decreed that parishioners have to stop leaving their pews and galavanting all over the church, shaking hands with everybody in sight during the “sign of peace” demonstration. Nobody ever told you that you COULD do that—and it cheapens what should be a reverent and respectful attitude towards the sacredness of what takes place on the altar. Whatever you think of the pre-Conciliar atmosphere in the Church, congregations did display an outward sense of awe and respect in every way from dress to behavior during mass up through the 1960’s—which they do NOT today. The attire ranges from sloppy to seductive—the behavior is deplorable—and most deplorably, there is no pushback from the hierarchy. But the WORST of the changes in the Church consist in the gutting of Catechesis to the point where the average adult cradle Catholic knows less about his faith than I and my classmates did in 2nd grade in 1962. An increasing number of weekly mass-goers is casually living in mortal sin and thinking nothing of sacrilegiously receiving Communion—and that “change” is horrific. In fact I can’t think of words bad enough to describe it, because ultimately it means that these people are living one heartbeat away from hell, and from the pope right on down to the bishops and priests, there is NO PUSHBACK. Not even a half-hearted attempt to set them straight. The number of parishioners who go to confession at least several times a year is probably somewhere around a fraction of ONE PERCENT of the total number of mass-goers. And you know what? I think it’s a pretty good guess that those are the ONLY people living in a state of grace. If you’re an adult with full use of reason, and you haven’t been to confession in ten, twenty or thirty years, I don’t see how you can reasonably expect to get to heaven after death. So you see, Lisa—when you complain about people criticizing the “changes,” you have to be more specific before I know whether I can agree with you.

Posted by Lisa on Sunday, Aug, 17, 2014 7:11 PM (EDT):

I personally disagree with just about everything that I have read. I think the changes that have happened in the church did not happen over night and I am sure that they were only done after much discussion and prayer. I believe we need to respect those decisions. If you are unhappy, then find a new “home” that fills your needs, but please don’t push your preferences, wishes, and wants, on those of us that are happy.
Peace… (and that’s with a big handshake and a hug, like we do in our parish.)

Posted by Tucson on Sunday, Aug, 17, 2014 12:38 PM (EDT):

A very old Catholic informed me that church music is supposed to be either the organ or indigenous instruments. He said the ONLY musical instrument indigenous to the United States is the banjo.

[The guitar is indigenous to Spain.]

Posted by Tucson on Sunday, Aug, 17, 2014 12:36 PM (EDT):

Inform / teach people about the importance of “the Dismissal” and say it in Latin: “Ite, Missa Est” ... “Deo Gratias” carries a lot more weight than the english translation. [“Thank G*d, we’re outa here.]

And it should be all but shouted.

[I just learned that if you leave BEFORE the dismissal, you don’t get “credit” for the Mass. Is that true?]

Posted by Larry Northon on Sunday, Aug, 17, 2014 11:01 AM (EDT):

The above sentence should read: “No matter how comfortable the 99 safe sheep are, we CAN’T just write off the lost ones.”

Posted by Larry Northon on Sunday, Aug, 17, 2014 10:58 AM (EDT):

St. Donatus: That’s wonderful! Obviously you don’t need me to urge you to keep going and finding that peace and strength where the Lord has led you, but for the record, I do anyway. I’m sure that Pope Benedict expanded the availability of the older Mass in order to give some shelter to those of us who need to come in out of the rain of mediocrity and silliness which is so deeply irksome. My concern though is that while the general frivolity—the lah-dee-dah attitude towards salvation of souls drives you and me, who have not drunk that Kool-Aid, batty, it is deadly poison to those who HAVE drunk the Kool-Aid and who sit there in the pews, fat and happy, feeling fine while in fact they’re dying eternally—and NO ONE even THINKS about getting an antidote to them before it’s too late. If the assumption is that they’re incorrigible anyway and the rest of us can do nothing but try to save ourselves, I challenge that assumption. I’m sure a lot of them ARE incorrigible, but I suspect a very large number are NOT, and would respond to a timely rebuke. In either case, God told the Prophet Ezekiel to get the message out to the people anyway, whether or not anybody listened—so it’s not for us to determine. The FSSP is a good and holy group of priests—but I suspect that there aren’t very many—IF ANY AT ALL—lukewarm lost souls sitting in front of them while they preach those wonderful homilies at the Latin Mass. You would agree, right? I don’t think the lukewarm would go anywhere NEAR a Latin Mass. Remember the parable of the lost sheep. I would like to see some of those FSSP priests go into the parishes on a regular basis, celebrate the Novus Ordo reverently and then deliver some of those marvelous sermons to folks who never hear them. I know that FSSP priests have trained for the Extraordinary Form—that is their calling—and I would not dream of PERMANENTLY taking them away from it—but OCCASIONALLY I would hope that an FSSP or two priest could step away from the 99 sheep who are safely pastured and go in search of the ones who have wandered—and to do this, he must offer the Novus Ordo—that’s where these lost sheep are (not to suggest that the Novus Ordo made them that way—inadequate catechesis did). Of course it’s another question whether our fat-and-happy bishops would ever permit this. I seriously doubt it. But my point is, they OUGHT to. No matter how comfortable the 99 safe sheep are, we just write off the lost ones. Somebody has to go out in search of them—and as we know, this is not just my opinion—it’s the Lord’s teaching. Anyway—God bless you, and maybe you could pray for the intention of the lost sheep at your next Mass.

Posted by St Donatus on Sunday, Aug, 17, 2014 9:26 AM (EDT):

Larry Northon, I agree with everything you say here. I would add that we as individuals do seem to fall short on caring for the needs of our brothers overseas who are being persecuted. We worry over things like the death or breakup of a movie star, rioting over police actions, food safety etc while our brothers are being martyred by the thousands.

None the less, I again, agree with you about the lukewarm gospels which has helped turn our faith into a lukewarm faith. Remember God said in the Bible that he would spit out the lukewarm faithful during the Judgement. Anyway, I finally gave up and started attending an FSSP parish where the homilies are strong, Biblical, and Holy. I leave ready to take on the devil in my life and live for God. Yes, the Latin in the Mass was difficult but by paying attention to the reverence and movements of the priest, reading along with the Latin in the Missal, and keeping my heart with God, it has helped me grow.

Of course, association with the very holy and God loving parishioners at the FSSP parish has been a blessing as well. (The FSSP is a group of priests formed by St Pope John Paul II.)

God bless you and may you find peace with our Lord.

Posted by Larry Northon on Saturday, Aug, 16, 2014 1:48 PM (EDT):

I have to second the sentiments of Footloose about the perpetual blandness of the Sunday homily—, i.e. “The Gospel message is a challenge to us every day…” but of course, we’re never told the specific WAYS in which the Gospel challenges us. I think there would be shock and awe if the priest ever added: “...to live chastely, stop fornicating, contracepting and committing adultery—to live sexuality only within marriage, and there to be generous with the gift of life…(etc)” I wonder how many people would mutter, “gee, what’s wrong with all THAT?” Even the most rigidly orthodox of our bishops keep most of their orthodoxy to themselves—preferring to speak on immigration, immigration, immigration. Our Holy Father, a good and faithful man who has been much and unjustly maligned, nonetheless seems to say little other than “be nice to the poor.” The fact is that Americans in general, and American Catholics in particular, are extraordinarily generous in giving money to worthy causes and needy people—so much so that if that were the only measure of sanctity, every one of us would deserve canonization after death—even the most lukewarm in their faith. Tightfistedness towards those who, through no fault of their own, desperately need monetary help is NOT among our vices (there are individual exceptions, of course)—hence it need NOT be repeatedly attacked in homily. What we DO need to be told is that the poor are not limited to those in obvious material need. The poor include those wounded in spirit by today’s lawless culture (“orphans of divorce”)—and they most certainly include not only the unborn, but the UNCONCEIVED as well—towards whom we are so hideously stingy that we are endangering the future of society with low and lower birth rates. I admire all the popes of the 20th-21st Centuries—but I frankly must admit that every pope starting with Paul VI has failed to adequately convey the message. Paul VI courageously issued Humanae Vitae in 1968—and then for the remaining ten years of his life and reign did virtually nothing else while rebellion flourished. John Paul I of course didn’t have time. St. John Paul II accomplished many great things, not the least of which was the Catechism, but he didn’t go far enough. Benedict XVI likewise. Francis, I think, has squandered many opportunities to speak the mind of the Church in the same manner in which he, as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, called out same-sex marriage as being from the devil. I often of late have absurd fantasies of God one day allowing me a chance to address some august Catholic gathering, where I lay out all these charges from the podium and it creates a public uproar which reaches all the way to Rome. Pretty foolish idea, isn’t it?

Posted by Phyllis Poole on Saturday, Aug, 16, 2014 1:03 PM (EDT):

I just wish all the servers would wash their hands in front of everyone so we could see they are clean -the priest washes his as he prepares for the consecration.
AND I wish we could have some quiet time, especially during communion so we could meditate without all that noise. And please pastor, tell the people to keep their heads down after receiving communion, not look up and watch all those coming back. They should be thanking God with heads down!
My biggest problem is disrespecting the host. I have seen numerous times parents go out with children with their backs to the elevation of the host during the consecration. I have seen many -since I sit at the back- doing everything during the consecration except adoring the host and chalice.
And the “peace” time, just don’t shake hands but nod.

Posted by Theresa H on Saturday, Aug, 16, 2014 12:48 PM (EDT):

Footloose and All: There are probably others in this Discussion Group who also sorrow over the “manner” of the celebration of the Mass they attend in their parish church—whether it be the actions of the attendees only, or includes those of the celebrant. Once a month, I go to the Tridentine Mass offered at our Cathedral (a couple miles away) for the consolation of my “spirit, soul, and body.”....The rest of the time, I offer this “sorrow” along with the sacrifice of Jesus being offered in every valid Mass. (Most likely, the “validity” of the Mass is NOT in question—If you really think otherwise, you should go to your Bishop.)

Posted by Footloose on Saturday, Aug, 16, 2014 11:24 AM (EDT):

“I cry after most N.O. masses because there is no sense of sacred and no reverence for the Presence of the Blessed Sacrament.”——
I too share your pain. May God accept our tears as an act of reparation and in His mercy grant a restoration. It’s sad that so many from the top down are spiritually blind to the point of being footloose and fancy-free, spouting that everything is just hunky-dory in the Church today. ——
The 8th thing to add to this list is for Priests, nuns, and religious to know, believe and boldly live and teach the entire Deposit of Faith given to us by God. We live in the “Information Age” yet catechesis is in the toilet. And the only thing uttered in homilies is the perpetual and mind numbing platitudes on love, peace, and joy that mean whatever each parishioner wants them to mean. They also need to restore the authentic teaching about purgatory, hell, and divine justice and associated prayers to the sacred liturgy.

Chris: “While the excessive amount of extraordinary ministers is unnecessary, watching people walk all the way around the church to stand in line in front of the priest (or whine about it) just comes accross as snobbish to me. And they usually look snobbish while in line. Jesus is not diminished. It’s not like Bob and Larry were up there during the liturgy of the Eucharist. Quite frankly, those attitudes are embarrassing when bringing guests and they see Catholics acting like that.”——-
Another perfect example of the herd mentality being used to shame and force everyone to accept ABUSES of the Mass that should never been introduced in the first place. Chris, your attitude and blatant ignorance is embarrassing.

Posted by Richard Raymond on Friday, Aug, 15, 2014 4:38 PM (EDT):

Long since felt there was way to great a degree of familarity between the
layity and hierarchy. Unfortunate consequence of the changes since vatican 11 and priest shortage. Same problem between men and women. Way to great
a degree of familarity. What’s the saying Familarity breeds contempt.
Totally agree with the article. Here’s why:http://www.olrl.org/snt_docs/fewness.shtml

Probably the easiest way to restore Gregorian chant is to use simple settings. Eleven Collections of Mass Propers in English are listed here: http://www.ccwatershed.org/english/propers/

Posted by Paaul on Thursday, Aug, 14, 2014 11:42 AM (EDT):

One suggestion to be added is the celebrate the extraordinary form alongside the ordinary, so that these elements can be allowed to enrich the entire liturgy almost through a “gravitational” force. That’s much of the idea behind Pope Benedict’s decision to remove any restrictions from the Old Mass. The Extraordinary Form can benefit also from a deeper sense of conscious participation and awareness of the liturgical action, following closely and praying the prayers with the priest. The low liturgical culture that sometimes surrounds the Extraordinary Form certainly needs change, but there’s nothing (contrary to certain comments here) about the old liturgy itself which discourages people from participating fully.

To those who insist that externals don’t matter, and all that matters is your internal disposition, that’s definitely what matters ultimately, but externals can aid us in forming our internal spiritual life. The discipline of the body and bodily gestures can and do enhance our worship. We have bodies, not only souls!

Posted by mrscracker on Thursday, Aug, 14, 2014 10:36 AM (EDT):

Dorotheus,
I’m kind of puzzled that you singled out “Western Christianity.” My small experience with Eastern churches was that they’ve “sorted out” how to do ritual far better than we have.And they tend to stick to what’s sorted out rather than re-invent constantly.
Anyway, God doesn’t need ritual, but we do.

Posted by St Donatus on Thursday, Aug, 14, 2014 9:22 AM (EDT):

@Dorotheus,

Yes, WE ARE GOD has worked well for the Church and faith for the last 50 years as it appears that the many in the Church have moved farther and farther in your direction. It is so interesting to see how widely people will take the ‘God in Us and Us in God’ principle. Yes, God is in us but through the Holy Spirit, his Grace marks our soul, but in the sense you speak, we don’t need to go to Church because WE ARE GOD. We don’t need to pray because he knows our thoughts and we know his. We can sin because Jesus already forgave us and besides, since we are God, we can make the rules. Isn’t that what everyone already believes.

Sorry, it all sounds good and warm and fuzzy and ... deadly and heretical.

The closest I have ever felt to God is in the Holy Mass during the consecration as heaven is opened up before us.

Posted by Dorotheus on Thursday, Aug, 14, 2014 8:59 AM (EDT):

When Christ died on the cross the veil of the temple was torn in two - the barriers between God and people were down. Western Christianity has largely replaced them, encouraging people to see God as majestic, glorious, holy and above all remote and themselves as far away from him. When people know themselves to be in God and God in them, then they will have a true (not merely religious) sense of the sacred which will be expressed not only in worship, but in everything else in their lives. I am not sure, however, whether many people in the Church know how to help restore the sense of God in us and us in God. They stay at the level of defining doctrines, brushing up moral codes and sorting out how to do rituals. They are interested mostly in being correct within the terms of their religious system. This does not get you very far,

Posted by mrscracker on Thursday, Aug, 14, 2014 8:58 AM (EDT):

Brian Amundsen ,
The focus of the Mass is on Christ, not us. Our demeanor,hopes,joys, etc are what we bring to Mass.

Posted by Philip Dillon on Thursday, Aug, 14, 2014 7:39 AM (EDT):

If all of these changes were made, the Ordinary Form would still be inferior to the Extraordinary Form. These are mostly cosmetic changes; what about the actual prayers of the Mass? What about the absence of gestures and genuflections?

The Extraordinary Form is far superior Look at the longer Confiteor said while kneeling; the Kyrie said in three sets of three; the beautiful Offertory prayers; the beautiful Prefaces; the silent Roman Canon; the Oblations of the Victim to God; the prayers said at the Communion of the Faithful; the Leonine prayers. All of these prayers are theologically beautiful and sacred.

If the Church wants to restore the sacred she should consider adapting the prayers of the Ordinary Form. We need a “Reform of the Reform”; we need the New Liturgical Movement founded by Pope Benedict to continue.

In addition, why stop with the Mass? What about the calendar? Why not restore the pre-lenten season? Why not restore the Octave of Pentecost? Why not restore the Season after Pentecost; nobody can honestly say Ordinary Time is better?

Posted by JOHN B on Thursday, Aug, 14, 2014 5:46 AM (EDT):

Isn’t it great that us Catholics can ‘let rip’ on this blog and put our thoughts out there. I’ve contributed to a few of these blogs over the past few years and I’ve enjoyed it. Sometimes I feel justified by my comments and at other times I’ve needed to check myself, usually because of my pride. Many of us hold the best intentions and as I’ve said interaction has been fun and at times an education.

Posted by jesse ville on Thursday, Aug, 14, 2014 12:42 AM (EDT):

Another tip: Always act in charity such as refraining from hyperbolic comments such as “Ditch The Sign of Peace or “Take your stinking paws off me you darn dirty ape!”

Posted by Bruce in Iloilo on Thursday, Aug, 14, 2014 12:05 AM (EDT):

Good article. It is important to remember that it is not all one or the other—all Latin Mass or all “Spirit of Vatican II”. Indeed, the feeling of the mass often has more to do with implementation than with the specific rubrics on the page. I have been at Tridentine Latin Masses that were not very sacred and at beautiful, very sacred, full-on Norvus Ordo, Vatican II-spirit masses (a particularly good later version was at an American Jesuit college). There are many rubric options at a mass. One should always choose the more sacred ones and then more importantly implement them in a sacred way.

Posted by Arthur Mullin on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 10:32 PM (EDT):

Jean Paul,
Are you talking about the comment you submitted at 2:39pm on 8/13/14, between Patti Day, (2:37pm) and Magdalene, (3:03pm)? You state that our religion begins when we step out of the door of the church. I understand that at that point we can start to evangelize and spread the faith in many ways, but we receive the graces to do that while we are IN the church. I have attended both forms of the Mass and your comment about Latin Mass attendees having a “me and God mentality” in absolutely absurd.

Posted by Jean Paul on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 8:00 PM (EDT):

Looks like Pat Archibald is selective on what he allows to be printed in these reviews. I placed a counter comment on his article and it appears that he deleted it for whatever reason. It certainly wasn’t rude. If we don’t agree with his comments, he simply cancels the comment. Hmmm.

Posted by Brian Amundsen on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 6:43 PM (EDT):

My whole point is that sacredness is an individual perspective and a grace from the Holy Spirit. Plus since obedience to the bishop and local parish priest is what we are called to by the Church, taught as a tradition and demonstrated by Christ being obedient to his Father unto the Cross, that anyone suggesting a bishop or priest should enforce sacredness through setting up rubics not consistent with the local parish tradition is simply going to make different people come to the parish but doesn’t change the heart of the original parishioner. As we read in multiple posting here, that the church emptied until new parishioners who were looking for the traditional latin order starting filling the pews, not the change of heart of the original parishioners! So the result is a lost sheep, driven away by the judgmental insistence of others that they weren’t being sacred enough. The sense of sacred in an orthodox African mass, is certainly different than in a mass in Rome. The sense of sacred is different in a Eastern Catholic mass than as practiced in the Roman rite. The Novus Ordo rite is approved as are the rites of the some other 22 Catholic rites of the Church. My point is that we need to point to joy and hope and not to what is wrong, because no-one knows the heart of the person in the pew next to them. We need both those who prefer latin tradition, and those who prefer the Novus Ordo, because the teaching Magesterium have found both to be sacred rites for the worship of the Lord’s Supper.

I provided a different point of view that each parish priest in obedience to his bishop, and each parishioner in obedience to the the bishop and local parish priest, will find real sacredness by looking at their heart and identifying the joy and hope of their fellow parishioner, rather than focusing on what is wrong at the mass. This has been the point of Saint John Paul II, Pope Benedict, and now Pope Francis, that sacredness happens in each individuals heart, not as a result of the rules someone sets up.

To answer the example of a museum. Our local parish is not a museum being visited, but to address the example let us be sure to correctly identify each participant. It would be inappropriate for the visitor, a non-parishioner, to say well in my parish we have a knelling rail for Communion so I insist you install one here and you receive Communion that way, when the true authority (the local bishop) has already approved the sacred space for the parishioners. It would also be inappropriate for a visiting Minister of Sacred Music to attend a mass and write a complaint letter to the local parish priest saying they found the music to be lacking sacredness because the Greek version of the Sanctus was used, because this Minister is a visitor and doesn’t know the needs of the local parish. Again, my point is that as a faithful follower of Christ, a Roman Catholic, I have faith that the Magesterium, the local Bishop, and his assigned priest are best judges of what my local parish needs to help me and my fellow parishioners to grow in sacred worship. Do we need to be aware of abuses of the Novus Ordo, yes, but this article wasn’t about abuses to be aware of and how to address those issues. This article instead unjustly and inappropriately suggests that parishes are not sacred unless they have the listed acts occurring. Sowing such judgemental dissent in readers minds, simply acts to divide the body of Christ and doesn’t accept, as Christ did, the adulteress, the tax collector, the poor, the child, the dumb carpenter, and the uneducated fisher. They were all brought in to Christ’s house to celebrate the first mass and communion. Is there anything more sacred than having a feast with Christ, as we are, as he accepts us, because it is about my faith and relationship with Christ, not about whether others have a sense of sacredness from my demeanor. The focus isn’t my demeanor it is about my hope and joy in my savior Jesus Christ.

Posted by Linda Powell on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 6:41 PM (EDT):

I find that most Masses here in Georgia are positively horrible and are more like Southern Baptist conventions than holy liturgies. In our case, I have to take headphones with me to Mass, so that I can listen to Gregorian Chant before Mass begins to drown out all the talking and gadding about by everyone in the Sanctuary. After Mass, my husband and I who sit way up front to avoid the rush from Church, can be obviously kneeling a praying and people will hold loud conversations right in the pew in front of us. I usually ask that they take it outside since there are people who are trying to pray here. I cry after most N.O. masses because there is no sense of sacred and no reverence for the Presence of the Blessed Sacrament.

Our Archdiocese only has one Latin Mass available to us in all of North Georgia. It’s a pilgrimage for me and my daughter, but we make it at least 3 or 4 times a year. I introduced my daughter to the Traditional Latin Mass a couple of years ago. She loves it. She, too, is awed by the sense of the sacred.

I am going to send this article to my pastor. He’s working on trying to figure out a way that those of us who are older can kneel to receive Communion. Perhaps he will work on some of these others, too.

Posted by WIll on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 4:51 PM (EDT):

Silence in the Church before and after Mass would be a great help with instruction from the Pastor to use that time to prepare for Mass. At our Churches it is like attending a wedding reception before Mass.

With only one priest in a parish and several parishes closed and giant mergers came into being has thus have the need for many Eucharistic Minister’s. Without it would take forever to finish.

We have chant at Mass. Some Latin, also. The Mass can be sacred with the use of English. We also have Mass in Spanish and Vietnamese every Sunday at our parish and at another they have Italian.

I like the Mass with the priest facing the people. In some Churches he is then facing East as the people face west. I would like to see more emphasis on the use of the stole as the only garment over an alb. The stole is the symbol of priesthood and deacon and should be worn prominently. They could be at little ornate.

There is a small, country church about 15 miles from me that has implemented these suggestions. All Masses are packed. No EM’s. Communion rail reinstated. Holy Communion only under one species. The only thing that needs to go is the gladhanding. The school is overflowing and some parishioners travel as much as 20 miles each weekend to attend. Two miracles have occurred here: a host that was found in a pew stuck to a hymnal actually bled in the tabernacle, and a candle that mysteriously lit by itself in an Advent wreath.

The pastor here is a humble, holy man respected by all. That’s where it all starts.

Posted by Bibbit on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 1:21 PM (EDT):

To those who think these suggestion are silly, to those for whom sacredness is in the heart, not the acts, think about a few situations that may come up in life. You are at a museum and asked to be respectfully quiet and not touch anything. Do you think it’s because the folks who run the museum are archaic fools, or because the stuff in the museum is special? You’re a child who has been sent to the principal’s office and asked to sit in a chair just outside her office until she comes and gets you. Do you sit quietly and respectfully, or do you act as you would in your bedroom and start walking around, looking for something to use as a toy? If you’re anything less than an ardent troublemaker you sit quietly and consider your predicament and the actions that got you there. In both cases you recognize you are in a place or situation that requires you to behave differently, and as such you act differently, and you think differently, maybe even feel differently. Changing things that get parishioners to treat the church as a special place, the Tabernacle as a very special object, and communion as the most special event in the entire world, would go a long way towards changing the thoughts, hearts, and minds of the folks in the pews.

This isn’t about God and me, it’s about treating God the way He deserves to be treated.

Posted by icefalcon on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 1:06 PM (EDT):

Very good suggestions. But didn’t the liturgy originally include the kiss of peace? Do you think this should replace the handshake?

Posted by mrscracker on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 12:59 PM (EDT):

Brian Amundsen,
What allows us to experience a sense of the sacred varies according to the individual.The article was about restoring a *sense* of the sacred, not what is actually Holy.

Posted by Brian Amundsen on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 11:40 AM (EDT):

Sacredness is not brought about by masses that follow certain rubrics. These suggestions only remind me of the Latin Mass and not of sacredness. Sacred is a thoughtful, enveloping, attitude of the faithful attending, not of the celebration alone. While these suggestions implemented slowly might cause a change in the way the parishioners act during mass, we have no way to know if their relationship with Christ, their acceptance of the Holy Spirit and their love for God is being increased or if they are simply following the flow. Sacredness is not how one acts outwardly, but rather the change in one’s heart toward God. The Bishop and pastors assignment are to discern the needs and know the flock and guide it to God and the Life. If we believe the Holy Spirit is alive in the Church then we also believe that the Spirit is working in every life of every parish member. We hope that they will have open hearts to receive Christ and the love that is so graciously poured out to them, regardless of how the mass is celebrated, save the sanctity necessary for the Eucharist. Do we really think the masses in the Middle East in the middle of war torn zones, in the houses of faithful Chinese and N Korean gathering must follow all these suggestions simply to be sacred? I don’t, because the faithful are attending as a response to the spark of hope and love present in their faithful lives. I know the Trinity is present, and while I favor some of your suggestions, I also believe that the parish priest and bishop better know what is necessary for the local church than outsiders who have their preferred way of celebrating the wedding feast. Please first start praying for the local priest, the bishop, and that the Holy Spirit be present and real at every Mass, this will increase sacredness more than actions. Then, do not be afraid to trust the Spirit, who will work in the parish to bring the faithful to sacred lives. We can faithfully follow our Stewart on Earth the holder of the keys to the kingdom, Pope Francis, who is always directing us to not point out what is bad or wrong in a person, but to celebrate what is good and where the spark of Christ’s hope can be found, there the Spirit can transform and enliven and bring salvation from death. While if we are always saying “this is what’s wrong”, “this is what sacredness must look like”, and “this is what you must demand of your priest”, then the seed of disobedience, dissent, and unloving acts are planted and nothing good will come from it. Do not be afraid, celebrate and give thanks to all that is good and blessed by God. Love as our Lord would have us love, knowing that our yoke is light because Christ is the victor. We have the gospel and it must be taught to the innocent children and adults who have not heard it, but it is a message of love and hope not of rules and what is wrong. The people will either listen or be deaf, but the sacredness of mass will be a result more of the people attending than of the rubrics the priest tries to implement. I’m not saying all rubrics need to be thrown out, I’m only saying lets start to write more about hope and love and less about criticism of what we judge as sacred and holy, because only God sees the widow’s mite, and parental needs of the crying child, and the dispair of the unemployed. Let our hearts open to Christ’s eyes. Let our discerning about what to write, be directed by the Holy Spirit. Let our life be full of God. In Christ Jesus our Lord.

Posted by Theresa H on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 11:10 AM (EDT):

I wasn’t suggesting that the Church go back to the Latin Mass per se (though once a month I usually attend the Tridentine Mass at our Cathedral where it is celebrated every Sunday), but pointing out the fact of how full the Churches were years ago—even though all Masses were in Latin (in the Latin Rite).... The fact that less than 35% of Catholics attend Mass on a regular basis today is probably due to the huge change in our 21st Century culture….“When the Son of Man comes, do you think he will find faith on the earth.” (LK 18:8)

Posted by St Donatus on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 10:46 AM (EDT):

JBS, I would agree with you. The key is to learn from how the bad change were implemented in the first place. I knew one priest who slowly implemented just the changes that Mr Archibold would like to see. It became the most prosperous parish in the diocese. Then when this priest retired, a new priest was brought in who didn’t like this more reverent style of mass and switched everything back to the irreverent entertaining ways of the 80s and 90s. The number of parishioners in the parish has dropped by over 30% since he started and the actual attendance is even worse.

Again, the key is to explain why a specific change is made, present it as a holy and fun change to enjoy, implement it, let everyone become comfortable with it, then start the next move.

I know of another parish where the priests didn’t do it this way and the donations dropped so badly that they had to close the school. Five years later the donations are back up, the number of parishioners is now higher than before, and those that caused all the problem belong to a different parishes that is seeing a slow death.

Posted by JBS on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 10:35 AM (EDT):

Mister Archbold,

These are certainly fine ideas, but one would be hard-pressed to find a diocese whose bishop would tolerate their implementation. A willing priest is simply not enough. Further, collections tend to go down when priests attempt this sort of thing, at least in my experience. Catholics hungering for liturgical reverence are a small minority, sadly.

Posted by Ferrer on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 9:31 AM (EDT):

List the Confession Times rather than ‘by appointment’. A solid priest once said “If a person doesn’t kneel for the consecration at Mass then why would anyone want to kneel ?”

Posted by mrscracker on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 9:23 AM (EDT):

Posted by Richy C. on Tuesday, Aug 12, 2014 6:48 PM (EDT):

“One word: hairshirts.”
******************************************
Which for some of us translates to three words: “Folk Mass music.”
:)

Posted by Barbara on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 9:20 AM (EDT):

Another excellent reason for receiving the Eucharist on the tongue are the increasing incidents of the host being removed from the church and used in satanic masses and numerous satanic rituals. Episcopalians and Lutherans both kneel and receive on the tongue.
It is Our Lord we receiving!
If I must curtsy for the Queen, I should kneel for the King!
It is a sign of respect and reverence. Our Lord deserves no less.
Excellent suggestions and article.
I am going to speak to our priests and would urge others to so the same.

Posted by William on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 8:49 AM (EDT):

I love all of these, but The Modernistic ‘Enlightened’ Bishops will not change…

Posted by Scott W. on Wednesday, Aug, 13, 2014 8:34 AM (EDT):

Please do not allow your particular preferences - even if supported by tradition - to cause dissension between Christ’s members!

I agree. Now show me anything on the list that amounts to a personal whim. If anything, arbitrary whimsy comes mainly from one direction: the one that obscures Our Lord with trivializing anthropocentric silliness in worship. Yes, we should avoid dissension, but not at the expense of Truth.

Posted by Wells on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 11:26 PM (EDT):

I love and agree with all these things, unfortunately in our diocese, the priests that do these things are reprimanded by the bishop and chancery. If they don’t cease doing these things, then they are removed and sent away for brain washing. If they still don’t bend, they are banished or worse yet, pushed to be laicized. Heaven help us.

Posted by Josh McManaway on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 8:56 PM (EDT):

In light of your suggestion to use more Latin for the unchanging parts of the Mass, I thought I would start a series of posts on my own blog where I provide some grammatical explanations and try to help people feel more comfortable with the Latin. The first post is here: http://sonofthefathers.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/helping-you-with-latin-in-the-novus-ordo/

Posted by William Laudeman on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 7:24 PM (EDT):

Oh mercy! There are many points here with which I agree, particularly regarding chant ... point being that the Mass lives! Today, yesterday, tomorrow things will CHANGE . . . I believe Christ anticipated this, since He was the source of life itself. Traditions are wonderful in their place, but they are not rules, and change is not always a threat.

Please do not allow your particular preferences - even if supported by tradition - to cause dissension between Christ’s members!

Posted by Rosemarie Kury on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 7:14 PM (EDT):

I think the problem that began with the Eucharistic ministers is the mantra in our diocese do stewardship. That is each parishioner should volunteer to play a part in the parish. This we have lay people competing for lecterns and Eucharistic ministers. Our new pastor is trying to change things. Our assistant pastor chants much of the Mass and I notice that the Kyrie also is sung in Greek, and the Lamb of God, sometimes in Latin. He’s all but eliminated the Kumbaya mood in the Sign of Peace too. Now, I’d wish for better music, and would love to hear the old hymns. On Corpus Christi, we had Benediction, and the priest went around the church in procession carrying the Eucharist. However, it was supposed to be insenced, and the female server didn’t have a clue what to do, had to be instructed by our deacon. I believe that this was the only time we ever had Benediction and the hymns sung in Latin too. He is also beginning instructions for adults according to a program from the Franciscan College in Steubenville Ohio. He is from the Phillipines, God bless him. I only hope that our bishop doesn’t deter him in any way.

Posted by Richy C. on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 6:48 PM (EDT):

One word: hairshirts.

Posted by Terentia on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 4:18 PM (EDT):

Larry Norton, I was born in 1951 and agree that the majority of the congregation did receive communion. I hesitate to say that was usual because I have only the experience of a single parish. May be things were different other places but I doubt it. We also had 2 priests hearing confessions for several hours every Sat. In my family the practice was to go to confession 1-2 times a month. All my friends did the same. The priest who gave that homily was born in the 70’s. He has no experience of pre Vatican II Catholicism.
As for the idea that people didn’t know what was going on during the Mass because of Latin, I still have the St Joseph Missile I received at my First Communion and used every Sunday. Even at the age of 7, I knew what was happening.

Posted by mrscracker on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 3:59 PM (EDT):

Jean Paul ,
The premise was how to restore a sense of the sacred, not who is holier.

Posted by Amy on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 3:57 PM (EDT):

If you haven’t read the letter by Father Richard Heilman at the beginning of the article, please do. Enlightening!

Posted by Scott W. on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 3:41 PM (EDT):

The old ways of celebrating the Mass (Latin and all) did not make Catholics any more holier than they are now

Rather than get into the subjective, use any verifiable metric you want (Mass attendance, numbers of vocations, donations, school closings, etc.) and the message is clear: dioceses that hew close to tradition have better Mass attendance, plenty of vocations, donations, and in some cases are actually opening more schools. Contrast that with, say, the Diocese of Rochester under the disastrous 33-year reign of hippydom under Bishop Clark. It’s at the bottom of the lists in all those categories while leading in school and parish closings. (Thankfully Bishop Matano has his head screwed on right.) It’s always astonishing how people can look at the the smoldering pile of ruble that used to be the Episcopal Church and think that this vertical meal-sharing approach is something to emulate.

Posted by Magdalene on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 3:03 PM (EDT):

Our young priest offered Mass Ad orientem last Saturday morning for the first time; he had wanted to for a long time. During the week we have kneelers out so can receive kneeling and on the tongue. It is the older folks who had to live through the 70s and 80s who find it hard to do that and not because of bad knees either. For years they had it drummed into them that kneeling, etc. was no longer needed and people who did so were disobedient fanatics and so made fun of.

At my Novus Ordo parish we had a whole slew of little girls at the altar even at the earliest Mass where it is usually older boys. Stupid gather songs and songs about us but those who have grown up with all this do not know anything different until, sensing something is missing or just not quiet right, they attend a couple of TLMs and then they are hooked!

Posted by Jean Paul on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 2:39 PM (EDT):

Sorry, but you can’t turn back the clock. The old ways of celebrating the Mass (Latin and all) did not make Catholics any more holier than they are now. The Supper of the Lamb is both sacrifice and a sacred meal. There must be a balance of both. Moreover, our religion begins when we step out the door of the church after Mass. What we need is excellent homilies, not a bunch of liturgical rules and pre-Vatican II rites that cater to those who have just a “me and God” mentality.

Posted by Patti Day on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 2:37 PM (EDT):

A reverent and beautiful celebration of the Novus Ordo can be seen everyday on EWTN. The Kyrie, Sanctus, Pater Noster, and often the Gloria are sung in Latin, and the people in the pews sing the Latin too. The Mass isn’t said ad orientum and there isn’t an altar rail, but most people genuflect before taking Communion on the tongue. A few still take it in the hand, but not many. There is an organ and sacred hymns sung by a cantor. I long to have such a beautiful Mass at my parish, but It’s unlikely, as our priest thinks girls should be altar servers, everybody should take a turn at being an extraordinary minister, we should join hands and throw them up in the air at the end of the Our Father, then run willy nilly across the aisle to shake hands (facepalm). Sadly, we have the disturbance of the peace rather than the Kiss of Peace.

Posted by kevin on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 2:00 PM (EDT):

I think the mass is perfect on the supernatural level. Our expression of the mass on a human level is lacking. I think most of the suggestions you make would make the mass on a strictly human level worse. Doing more chants is a great idea. More incense is promising as well. Reducing/eliminating extraordinary ministers (except in the most necessary circumstances) makes a lot of sense. Eliminating the sign of peace is popular these days, but I think it would be a big mistake. More Latin would be a mistake. The priest facing away from the people is not a good answer.
People in the congregation do not view the mass as sacred, because they do not understand it. Catechesis is part of the problem, but the mass even in the vernacular is not an expression of how modern people express sacredness. Without a repeat of the tower of Babel, we need to find a way to help the mass to express on a human level the miracle which occurs on the supernatural level. People are bored at mass. That is not because God is not doing His part. It is because we are not reflecting the miracle of the Eucharist in a compelling way on the human level. The common response is that people who are bored at mass are not trying hard enough. They are not devout enough. They are horrible. Maybe, but I think there is more to it. Latin is not the answer, because people don’t understand Latin. It is foreign to them, which is good in the sense that God is transcendent, but not good in the sense that people can’t be intimate with someone who is foreign to them. Getting rid of the sign of peace would eliminate one of the few things during mass that is still intimate on a human level. I think the changes (not the abuses, which certainly occurred liturgically and catechetically) from Vatican II were aimed at enabling the modern person to understand that while God is majestic and divine, He is not foreign to them. That is a thin line to walk, but returning to Latin and eliminating the sign of peace are moves in the wrong direction. What we have now strictly on the human level is insufficient (of course the power of the sacrament is from God and is therefore perfect) and we need to work hard to find appropriate adjustments, which will enable more reverence at mass and at the same time facilitate true intimacy.

Posted by St Donatus on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 1:20 PM (EDT):

Gatto,

Are we asking that every parish make these changes. All I want is ONE parish with ONE mass in my city to make that change. Then the rest of us can have our spiritual needs too. But NO, the 70s and 80s crowd won’t even allow one reverent mass in a whole city. I thought Bishops were supposed to meet the spiritual needs of all their flock, not just people that agree with you Gatto.

Posted by David on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 1:09 PM (EDT):

For those who may not know as Theresa implies, “Holy, Holy, Holy” means “Santo, Santo, Santo”. It’s just one of the prayers you can learn by attending a Spanish mass if you are so inclined.

As the face of the American Catholic Church changes, let us be mindful of the intent that our Pope from South American in a letter dated July 11, the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life when it issued a decree saying that Pope Francis requires all the friars the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate to celebrate the liturgy according to the ordinary rite,” the post-Vatican II Mass, and that the use of the so-called extraordinary form or pre-Vatican II Latin Mass “must be explicitly authorized by the competent authorities for every religious or community that makes a request.”

Is the Pope teaching something for all of us when he directs the faithful to “celebrate the liturgy according to the ordinary rite”?

Posted by JessieM on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 1:00 PM (EDT):

I agree with all of these except for the dress part. I really don’t think that our Lord will weigh that heavily against other stuff.

Posted by BobOne on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 12:45 PM (EDT):

I have attended three parishes over the last 50 years. They all had great music - heavy on the more modern but with generous sprinklings of Latin chant from the old days, guitar, piano, organ, violins, etc. In all three parishes the music was uplifting, reverent and sacred. But, in all three parishes we paid a living wage for the director of music. He/she knew what they were doing. In all three parishes, we used EMC’s. With one priest, it would have taken hours to distribute to 750-800 people at each Mass. In northern California, at least, communion is with host and wine. With only one priest, you always need a second person to help, even at the weekday Mass where there are only a 100 or so people. In all three parishes, we were taught that the Mass wasn’t over until the last verse of the recessional hymn. Very few people leave church before that. I could go on, but… Is it possible that the abuses are overly stated? I grew up with the Latin Mass. I don’t want to go back to those days.

Posted by mrscracker on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 12:44 PM (EDT):

David ,
I’ve done as you suggest many times with my children.They easily learned the prayers in Spanish.It’s not rocket science, especially if prayers are sung. The same applies to Latin-which is closely related to Spanish.
Good suggestion.Different outcome.

Posted by Theresa H on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 12:44 PM (EDT):

To put this very bluntly: Altar Server Girls should also be removed from the sanctuary. Period!

We have seen the desacralization of the “form” of the Mass for about 40 years—just about everywhere….I dare say, many/most of us today have little or no sense of what “Holy, Holy, Holy” means, let alone implies….(Consider what Sacred Scripture says…!) It will be a very difficult trek back to the restoration of the traditional “sense” of the holiness of the Holy Sacrifice. We have two generations steeped in the “Novus Ordo” and the unscripted innovations that have accompanied it—dare I say everywhere. (That’s what happens when something understood as “unchangeable” is “changed”—Where do you stop?)—We have forgotten, or—the younger ones—have never even learned, what it means to be present at the “Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.” Practically speaking: it has been more about “us” and what “WE” do: when, where, how, etc….(The “why” has not been emphasized—perhaps because there really is no good answer to the question!) I said I would be very blunt! It is sad….

Posted by David on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 12:37 PM (EDT):

Here’s one more for the list: Maybe for those who like a Latin mass they should support and go to the Catholic masses for the Spanish-speaking members of the Body of Christ in their neighborhoods. If you don’t want to actively participate but still support the Catholic Church it is the ideal situation if you don’t know the language. Who knows, maybe you’ll experience a liturgy where you can observe others participating in the sacred mass and still have all the comfort you need to be alone and maintain a feeling of being the outsider.

Posted by JD on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 12:36 PM (EDT):

Yes! Also, this needs to be addressed (especially simpler, straightforward things like dress) in CCD/RE so all kids have the proper knowledge. Maybe they will even nag their parents.

Posted by mrscracker on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 12:20 PM (EDT):

Gatto,
I see the opposite. Young families, students, & all sorts of diverse folk attend the Latin Mass.Unlike the other Sunday Masses, noone runs out the door before the priest has even stepped off the altar.
Our previous diocese had a weekly Tridentine Mass & the local head of the NAACP attended.

Posted by PZ on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 12:04 PM (EDT):

“just make sure you have enough ushers present to keep the aisles clear in order to accommodate the stampede of people running out of the churches en masse.” ———
Umm, gatto, that already happened. It was called the 60s.——-
“What are we - living in the 1950’s again?”——
Yeah, who wants to go back to that era, what, with most Catholics attending Mass every week, parish schools well funded and full of nuns, a greater sense of Catholic identity, etc. Dark times indeed.

Posted by Larry Northon on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 11:31 AM (EDT):

As for the homily in which the priest said, “...in the bad old days before VII, very few people ever went to communion…” (among other things)—having been born and baptized in 1955, I’m in the very last age group to have personal memories of the Old Latin Mass when it was the norm. I don’t recall that those receiving were “very few” in number, but perhaps that was the case when the Eucharistic fast was longer than in my day. It had been shortened considerably by the time I had my first Communion (in the Old Rite). On the subject of flu season—it’s plain silly to avoid receiving Communion on the tongue when the cold and flu viruses are so easily passed that there’s almost no way you can avoid exposure. During just about any viral epidemic, the disease can be passed along by people who are not yet sick and also by people who never experience any symptoms. If you’re living as a bedridden invalid at home, never going out, all you need is a visit from a friend or caretaker to expose you to the latest virus, even if the visitor feels fine, and even if he or she hasn’t been around anyone who was sick. There’s no point is sitting at Mass saying to yourself, “I won’t receive Communion or do the handshake of peace today—I want to avoid the germs going around,” when you’re already picking them up from the missalette, from the pews, from breathing the air being polluted by the exhaling of everyone else—and to top it off, you may even already HAVE the virus inside you and be passing it along to people you meet even though you feel fine. We’ve become such ninnies today—we’re scared to death of all the wrong things—so scared we take ridiculous “precautions” that in fact are completely ineffective.

Posted by Gatto on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 11:23 AM (EDT):

Go ahead and implement these changes…just make sure you have enough ushers present to keep the aisles clear in order to accommodate the stampede of people running out of the churches en masse. What are we - living in the 1950’s again? If you want to go back to the Latin Mass, chant, priest facing the altar, etc., then go find yourself a parish where they do that…stop trying to force it upon the rest of us!

Posted by Keith on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 11:17 AM (EDT):

Every item you list would be wonderful & welcome. But the chances of any of them with my and most bishops and priests = ziltch.

Posted by PZ on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 11:10 AM (EDT):

“about 1500 people attend the late morning masses. 98% of them receive communion. That in itself is a very good thing.”————
Wow, it’s good to see so many people receiving communion in a state of grace. You must have long lines for confession throughout the week.

Posted by Gary on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 10:33 AM (EDT):

the is the way it is because the mass before it was in latin was in the language of the local people. chant and polyphony music were centuries ago a time we don’t live in. I read a book about history of the mass. vatican ll wants people to particpate in the mass. if they can particapate in the in latin then use latin if they don’t know latin use local language. people are not going to learn latin to participate in the mass. the idea of the mass is people to particpate which was not being done with mass in latin.

Posted by septuagenarian on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 9:57 AM (EDT):

I grew up in the pre Vatican II liturgy, with masses just like Pat wishes they were now. This was in a catholic country in South America. But let me add this. Only in the early morning masses you would have faithful receiving communion (overnight fasting made it hard otherwise). Not a problem with going to the rail and kneeling down. Also, no second species. It moved quickly. On the later masses, 98% just followed the mass but did not receive (nor sing). In the later hour masses where I now live (a Houston suburb), about 1500 people attend the late morning masses. 98% of them receive communion. That in itself is a very good thing. I can only imagine how long it would take if it was done the traditional way. Also, everybody sings. Tradeoffs, I suppose.

Posted by Chris on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 9:54 AM (EDT):

While the excessive amount of extraordinary ministers is unnecessary, watching people walk all the way around the church to stand in line in front of the priest (or whine about it) just comes accross as snobbish to me. And they usually look snobbish while in line. Jesus is not diminished. It’s not like Bob and Larry were up there during the liturgy of the Eucharist. Quite frankly, those attitudes are embarrassing when bringing guests and they see Catholics acting like that.

Posted by Paul Griffiths on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 8:45 AM (EDT):

Jon in Oregon,

Rest assured that when the Mass is celebrated ad orientem, the sacred host and chalice are elevated so that the whole congregation can adore them!

Posted by Jon in Oregon on Tuesday, Aug, 12, 2014 2:57 AM (EDT):

I like all of these except two. I prefer having the Priest facing the people because I am incredibly moved when he holds the Eucharist up for all to see, some weeks I begin to cry when this occurs. The other thing I would not change is allowing the Priest to move about during the homily. Our Church is set up rather differently than most Churches (probably because it was built in the 70’s), so it adds to the homily instead of detracting from it. We do have one Priest and one deacon who stand still and read from their notes while delivering their homilies. I can’t tell you anything about their last ten homilies but I remember every homily given by the Priest who moves about. Also, my children, ages 15 to 25 are more engaged when the Priest moves around and sometimes uses props during his homily.
The music must change! It would be better to have no music at all rather than what we have now.

Posted by Patricia Shaw on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 10:13 PM (EDT):

Over the years in Novus Ordo I missed using my thick Missal with its Litanies and wearing the mantilla. I recalled the Sunday best dignified dress, Communion Rail, Latin and solemn chant. I believe the loss of reverence in The Catholic Church is related to the overall societal irreverence towards chastity, women, the womb, infants and covenantal marriage. This irreverence is quickly becoming chaos proportional to man turning away from God and His laws. So yes to Ad Orientem and all else in this article. We also need serious homilies for the grave problems, sins and addictions in society.

Posted by Romulus on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 9:59 PM (EDT):

No females in the sanctuary. But recruit some solid men.

Posted by Jay on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 9:40 PM (EDT):

Excellent post! I agree strongly with every single thing you have listed.
Here in St. Louis, Fr. Brian Harrison at Our Lady of Victories Church, says a beautiful Novus Ordo Mass that incorporates every suggestion you have listed. Heaven on earth!

Posted by Amy on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 9:03 PM (EDT):

A few recordings of the Mass Ad Orientem on Youtube. Just watching them, I was in awe of the sacred and holy liturgy of the Mass. An ancient tradition, so reverent and beautiful, yet in the vernacular.

Posted by Robin P. on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 8:56 PM (EDT):

Excellent Article! I wish every priest in our Archdiocese (Seattle) would consider these moves. The pastors of the Novus Ordo parishes wince at the numbers of people swelling the ranks of the Extraordinary Form (Latin) Masses, but they do nothing to entice anyone away from the Latin Mass. Rather they continue their banalization and desacralization of the Novus Ordo Mass, and their congregations are dwindling (and greying). Meanwhile the migration to the Latin Mass continues. I particularly see a lot of the males, young adults, and young large families. If you want entice people back to the Novus Ordo, you need to as a minimum go by the REAL dictates and guidelines of Vatican II and stop the abuses.

Posted by Mark M. on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 8:47 PM (EDT):

Yes! And Latin and chant are NOT JUST FOR LENT ANYMORE. (They never should have been “just for Lent” in the first place.)

Posted by Jana on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 8:37 PM (EDT):

@Cindy yes, I’m aware they cannot ban reception on the tongue. They say they are not except in cases where flu season is really bad. Then it’s falling under sanitary reasons. Otherwise, the rest of the year it’s okay to receive on the tongue. This hasn’t really posed a problem recently though because I have an armload of babies or toddlers and a free hand is not possible. I’ve had a bishop refuse to give communion to me on the tongue for this reason (at the time I had no children to fill my arms). Can a temporary ban of communion on the tongue be permitted in the instance of community illness?

Posted by Catholic pilgrim on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 7:18 PM (EDT):

“progressive Novus Ordo mass at St. Banal of Boringham parish or the Traditional Latin Mass at the Parish of Quo Primum on the corner of Lunatic and Fringe.” Pat, did you seriously have to make fun of my favorite two parishes? Did you?! I love those two parishes the most. (Just Kidding) On serious note, these are actually good, sensible & simple steps.

Posted by Tom Byrne on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 6:46 PM (EDT):

Facing ad orientem requires RE-CENTERING THE TABERNACLE under a large and prominent crucifix, which will also make it easier to restore the habit of genuflection, which is difficult if the Tabernacle is “off-center”. I must agree with you on Eucharistic ministers. When I began serving as one (I have also been a lector for 40 years) it was once and while, when the congregation was large. Now we have FIVE at every Mass. That can’t be right.

Posted by Terentia on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 6:40 PM (EDT):

How I would love this but it won’t happen any time soon in my parish or diocese. On Corpus Christi, the homily at my parish included a history lesson expounding on how in the bad old days before VII, very few people ever went to communion and priests “hated” administering communion because they had to walk back and forth as people were “forced” to kneel at a railing. Yeah, I don’t think any of these excellent suggestions will be implemented here.

Posted by charles on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 6:03 PM (EDT):

Great stuff and by the way there is hope. As JP points out, a lot of younger people seem to be more conservative and orthodox than the baby boom generation that I belong to.
I learned that lesson this weekend. As I turned to leave church this past weekend, I couldn’t help but notice that the person behind me, a young man in 20’s who was not there during the sign of peace, was wearing a blue with gold numerals UCLA football jersey. He then asked me what Sunday in Ordinary Time it was which led to a general discussion of the church calendar. The last thing on earth which I would expect in new jersey of all places is for someone with a ucla football jersey on to want to have a thorough discussion of the church calendar. Could he be discerning a calling, who knows, right? My gut told me that was a possibility.
back to football jerseys for a second. If someone my age shows up wearing an NFL jersey on game day, then I find that to be annoying, distracting and sophmoric. If a high school or college person does that it doesn’t bother me in the least. In other words, some give and take depending on a person’s age. Flip flops should never be worn to church by any person of any age.

Posted by tg on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 5:34 PM (EDT):

I wish you were in charge. This weekend, there were so many little girls in the altar. It made me sick. (I’m female.) No wonder there’s a shortage of priests. I like your ideas, Pat but it will never happen unless something really drastic happens within the church.

Posted by Luke on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 4:56 PM (EDT):

I think that any Priest in our diocese who tried to celebrate Mass Ad Orientem would find himself transferred in short order to our equivalent of Siberia, regardless of what his supposed rights are.

Posted by Cindy Coleman on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 4:28 PM (EDT):

@Jana Not legitimate prohibit reception on the tongue. Everyone has the choice to receive Communion on the tongue or in the hand. In fact, it is the NORM of the Latin rite to receive on the tongue. In the US we only have the option to receive in the hand due to an indult (special permission). This link references several Church documents including the General Instruction on the Roman Missal. http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/can-a-bishop-prohibit-receiving-communion-on-the-tongue

Posted by mrscracker on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 4:23 PM (EDT):

Chattering before, during, & after the Mass.
I think this comes under:“General Reverence and Sacredness.”
This past Sunday, the loud chattering began while the priest stepped off the altar.Nobody paid attention to the closing hymn(the choir gave up after 1 verse) & there was a noisy rush to get out the door ASAP.
If you try to hang around following Mass to light a candle, the ushers look impatient because they’re also trying to lock up & get home ASAP.
:(

Posted by J. P. Cavanaugh on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 4:20 PM (EDT):

Before converting a number of years ago, I was a Lutheran. So far as I am aware, Lutherans still kneel at a communion rail and the pastor still (at least part of the time) faces an alter while his back is to the assembly, and nobody gives these things a second thought.

I would personally welcome many if not all of these suggestions, particularly with regard to music at Mass, which is almost universally awful in the U.S. I am in my mid 50s, and keep telling myself that help is on the way in the form of a younger generation of more orthodox priests and parishioners.

Posted by Mrs. Amen on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 4:07 PM (EDT):

Yes, please. Could we also eliminate the Children’s Liturgy of the Word” while you’re at it?

Posted by Pat Archbold on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 4:06 PM (EDT):

A friendly reminder. Rude = deleted.

Posted by Thetimman on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 3:47 PM (EDT):

And don’t forget the real Mass.

Posted by mrscracker on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 3:43 PM (EDT):

Silvie,
I agree that for the most part, younger parishoners are more conservative.So, maybe time is the remedy.

Posted by Jana on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 3:41 PM (EDT):

While I love all this and hope it would be implemented, one thing I noticed is that you stated reception on the tongue cannot be forbidden. In our diocese, every year the Bishop says that recpetion on the tongue is not allowed during flu season and that we must receive in the hand or not at all. Is this legitimate?

Posted by Silvie on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 3:32 PM (EDT):

I tend to agree with Outman’s comment. In the three parish churches I regularly attend (large family spread over a few towns), there are often so many Eucharistic ministers that getting to a priest to receive can be a bit of an acrobatic feat. These churches are dominated by lay committees of well-meaning but generally tasteless folks who would stage an uprising if their ‘participation’ in the Mass was reigned in. So, those of us who see the need for something a little quieter (amplification of horrible 70’s hymns is a huge problem) or more sacraments (confession by appointment only) are considered crazies who want to take us back to the ‘bad old days’ of abusive priests. This is the canard with which the 60’s and 70’s generation insults and demeans the Latin rite and its adherents. My only source of hope is that Our Lord has provided a biological solution to this problem. The ‘conservatives’ are all under 45 and have more children than the ‘liberals’ who seem to average at 65…

Posted by mrscracker on Monday, Aug, 11, 2014 2:41 PM (EDT):

Restore altar rails!

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won't publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.

Patrick Archbold is co-founder of Creative Minority Report, a Catholic website that puts a refreshing spin on the intersection of religion, culture, and politics. When not writing, Patrick is director of information technology at a large international logistics company in New York.